Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)
Xpro India Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the employment and termination process. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. allegations against the private respondent regarding confidentiality breach. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. findings from the enquiry and conduct of the disciplinary proceedings. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 4. legal standards concerning forfeiture of gratuity for misconduct. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. judicial review standards in disciplinary matters. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 6. final judgment and dismissal of the writ application. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
1. The present writ application has been preferred against orders dated 09.02.2024 and 30.12.2024 passed by the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively.
2. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the companies Act, 1956 and performing as the sole Dielectric Film Manufacturer in India.
3. The private respondent no. 4 was appointed w.e.f. 01.08.2012 in the petitioner company as a technician.
4. It is further stated that the private respondent being in a responsible position was privy to various process, techniques, recipes which are developed with the c
Termination of service and forfeiture of gratuity require substantial proof of misconduct; mere allegations are insufficient without evidence or conviction for moral turpitude.
1. Departmental proceedings cannot be continued and a penalty cannot be imposed after an employee has ceased to be in service, in the absence of a specific provision for continuation of the proceedin....
Forfeiture of gratuity can only occur upon conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction for an offence involving moral turpitude, as established in Union Bank of India v. C. G. Ajay Babu and Other....
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Hans Raj Mutreja For the Respondent : Tej Kumar Malik
Tribunals cannot interfere with disciplinary findings unless perverse or without evidence; departmental proceedings independent of criminal cases with preponderance of probabilities standard; punishm....
Forfeiture of gratuity for misconduct involving moral turpitude is permissible without a criminal conviction, emphasizing the discretion of the appointing authority in determining the extent of forfe....
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; courts defer to disciplinary authorities unless findings are perverse or unsupported by evidence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
